Evidence for treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: results of a systematic literature search update

OBJECTIVE

A systematic literature review (SLR; 2009-2014) to compare a target-oriented approach with routine management in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to allow an update of the treat-to-target recommendations.

METHODS

Two SLRs focused on clinical trials employing a treatment approach targeting a specific clinical outcome were performed. In addition to testing clinical, functional and/or structural changes as endpoints, comorbidities, cardiovascular risk, work productivity and education as well as patient self-assessment were investigated. The searches covered MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane databases and Clinicaltrial.gov for the period between 2009 and 2012 and separately for the period of 2012 to May of 2014.

RESULTS

Of 8442 citations retrieved in the two SLRs, 176 articles underwent full-text review. According to predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria, six articles were included of which five showed superiority of a targeted treatment approach aiming at least at low-disease activity versus routine care; in addition, publications providing supportive evidence were also incorporated that aside from expanding the evidence provided by the above six publications allowed concluding that a target-oriented approach leads to less comorbidities and cardiovascular risk and better work productivity than conventional care.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study expands the evidence that targeting low-disease activity or remission in the management of RA conveys better outcomes than routine care.

European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis with pharmacological therapies: 2015 update

BACKGROUND

Since the publication of the European League Against Rheumatism recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in 2012, new evidence and new therapeutic agents have emerged. The objective was to update these recommendations.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed regarding pharmacological treatment in PsA. Subsequently, recommendations were formulated based on the evidence and the expert opinion of the 34 Task Force members. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendations were allocated.

RESULTS

The updated recommendations comprise 5 overarching principles and 10 recommendations, covering pharmacological therapies for PsA from non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), to conventional synthetic (csDMARD) and biological (bDMARD) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, whatever their mode of action, taking articular and extra-articular manifestations of PsA into account, but focusing on musculoskeletal involvement. The overarching principles address the need for shared decision-making and treatment objectives. The recommendations address csDMARDs as an initial therapy after failure of NSAIDs and local therapy for active disease, followed, if necessary, by a bDMARD or a targeted synthetic DMARD (tsDMARD). The first bDMARD would usually be a tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor. bDMARDs targeting interleukin (IL)12/23 (ustekinumab) or IL-17 pathways (secukinumab) may be used in patients for whom TNF inhibitors are inappropriate and a tsDMARD such as a phosphodiesterase 4-inhibitor (apremilast) if bDMARDs are inappropriate. If the first bDMARD strategy fails, any other bDMARD or tsDMARD may be used.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations provide stakeholders with an updated consensus on the pharmacological treatment of PsA and strategies to reach optimal outcomes in PsA, based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion.

Clinical outcomes and safety of rituximab treatment for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) - results from a nationwide cohort in Germany (GRAID)

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this article is to evaluate the safety and clinical outcome of rituximab treatment in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients refractory to standard of care therapy in a real-life setting in Germany.

METHODS

The GRAID registry included patients with different autoimmune diseases who were given off-label treatment with rituximab. Data on safety and clinical response were collected retrospectively. In SLE patients, clinical parameters included tender and swollen joint counts, fatigue, myalgia, general wellbeing, Raynaud's and the SLEDAI index. Laboratory tests included dsDNA antibody titres, complement factors, hematologic parameters and proteinuria. Finally, the investigators rated their patients as non-, partial or complete responders based on clinical grounds.

RESULTS

Data from 85 SLE patients were collected, 69 female and 16 male, with a mean disease duration of 9.8 years. The mean follow-up period was 9.6 ± 7.4 months, resulting in 66.8 patient years of observation. A complete response was reported in 37 patients (46.8%), partial response in 27 (34.2%), no response in 15 (19.0%). On average, major clinical as well as laboratory efficacy parameters improved substantially, with the SLEDAI decreasing significantly from 12.2 to 3.3 points. Concerning safety, one infusion reaction leading to discontinuation of treatment occurred. Infections were reported with a rate of 19.5 (including six severe infections) per 100 patient years.

CONCLUSION

With the restrictions of a retrospective data collection, the results of this study confirm data of other registries, which suggest a favourable benefit-risk ratio of rituximab in patients with treatment-refractory SLE.

EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2013 update

In this article, the 2010 European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (sDMARDs and bDMARDs, respectively) have been updated. The 2013 update has been developed by an international task force, which based its decisions mostly on evidence from three systematic literature reviews (one each on sDMARDs, including glucocorticoids, bDMARDs and safety aspects of DMARD therapy); treatment strategies were also covered by the searches. The evidence presented was discussed and summarised by the experts in the course of a consensus finding and voting process. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendations were derived and levels of agreement (strengths of recommendations) were determined. Fourteen recommendations were developed (instead of 15 in 2010). Some of the 2010 recommendations were deleted, and others were amended or split. The recommendations cover general aspects, such as attainment of remission or low disease activity using a treat-to-target approach, and the need for shared decision-making between rheumatologists and patients. The more specific items relate to starting DMARD therapy using a conventional sDMARD (csDMARD) strategy in combination with glucocorticoids, followed by the addition of a bDMARD or another csDMARD strategy (after stratification by presence or absence of adverse risk factors) if the treatment target is not reached within 6 months (or improvement not seen at 3 months). Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, biosimilars), abatacept, tocilizumab and, under certain circumstances, rituximab are essentially considered to have similar efficacy and safety. If the first bDMARD strategy fails, any other bDMARD may be used. The recommendations also address tofacitinib as a targeted sDMARD (tsDMARD), which is recommended, where licensed, after use of at least one bDMARD. Biosimilars are also addressed. These recommendations are intended to inform rheumatologists, patients, national rheumatology societies and other stakeholders about EULAR's most recent consensus on the management of RA with sDMARDs, glucocorticoids and bDMARDs. They are based on evidence and expert opinion and intended to improve outcome in patients with RA.

Understanding the patient perspective - results of the Rheumatoid Arthritis: Insights, Strategies & Expectations (RAISE) patient needs survey

OBJECTIVES

To gain insight into the management and treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the perspective of patients with moderate to severe disease.

METHODS

We recruited patients with moderate-to-severe, active RA who were either biologic naïve or biologic experienced (i.e. receiving biologic therapy) and then surveyed their perceptions of their disease and its management through a questionnaire. The survey was administered by computer-assisted telephone interview of patients in 9 countries (n=586) and covered diagnosis, treatment, physician interaction, and lifestyle with RA. Mean age at onset of RA symptoms was 41 years, with an average time to diagnosis of 3 years.

RESULTS

Most physician-patient communication centered on symptoms and treatment rather than the impact of RA on quality of life (QoL). Biologic users had significantly more 'good' days per month than biologic-naïve patients (71% vs. 61%). Of all patients, 22% reported high levels of pain on the day of the interview. A majority of patients considered their lives to be controlled by RA, despite the fact that they were receiving the current standard of care. Although potentially eligible for biologic therapy, as defined by a broad set of criteria for this investigation, 62% of biologic-naïve patients were not aware of biologic therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

The Rheumatoid Arthritis: Insights, Strategies & Expectations (RAISE) survey describes how patients with moderate to severe RA view their disease and which issues are critically important to them. Despite substantial impact on QoL and emotional health, a minority of patients discuss these issues with their physician. Also, despite improvements afforded by biologic therapy, continuing symptoms and pain occur in a proportion of RA patients.